About your Search

20121112
20121120
Search Results 0 to 8 of about 9 (some duplicates have been removed)
of a change. john boehner will be the speaker of the house, you know, unless something unforeseen happens in the next few weeks. he will be, he will keep the reign. the republicans gained, you know, a few seats, but that's not really going to effect his shot. he ran unopposed in ohio for his own race, and the defining conflict of the republican conference in the 112th congress, this sort of conflict between eric cantor, the majority leader, and john boehner, the speaker, is really behind them at least, you know, from everything that we have seen. the -- so that is remarkably stable, the first three positions. john boehner will be, you know, the next speaker, eric cantor will be the majority leader, and kevin mccarthy will be the majority whip. where it starts to get interesting is for the conference chairman position. this is currently held by jeb hensarling who is making a bid to be the financial services chairman. hensarling has been a sort of rising star for a while within republican ranks. he was a republican study committee chairman which is sort of the top conservative position in r
tax increases one way or another. bill: do you think that flies in the u.s. house? does john boehner have the votes to match that? >> the white house figures he will portray himself as the chapel yofnt middle class and the republicans are going out for the rift and he feels he can largely beat hem into submission. when they sit down to the bargaining table they might make some changes but he will want to come out of these negotiations as having largely won them and leaving scraps for the republicans. what the republicans have to hit back with is the way you increase revenues is by having rising incomes. you don't get that by higher taxes on a weakening economy. bill: the president plans to open the talks using his most recent budget proposal. wasn't that the budget that got zero votes in the senate? >> he's going to exploit it for all it's worth. you could come to an agreement using bowles and simpson and reducing rates so everyone declares victory. you have got more revenue but the rates don't go up. but i don't think the president is interested in that. if you had normal people doi
incomes now and ensuring security for the future. hthis is the end of vision that speaker boehner without for the country last week. i cannot think why the present would not embrace it. someone said we should go over the cliff. just go off of the cliff. hope for the best. i do not think that is what the american people had in mind when they went to the polls last week. but they had in mind is that we put the contest of the past two years behind us and work it out. the best way forward in the way that will lead to jobs and growth, a smaller deficits, and you were political fights is to keep everyone where they are. figure out a way to avoid the automatic defense cuts scheduled to hit at the end of the year without putting a penny last thing we promised and committed to the entitlement reforms that we all claim we want. a simpler tax code that lowers rates and cuts special interest loopholes would create jobs and result in more revenue without raising anyone's rates. we know this because we have seen it before. it actually works. i do not think washington should get any of that extra revenu
a tax increase. if speaker boehner says i'll go along with that, that's where we'll start. i think e converti is under way for a solution. >> ifill: senator durban, are you kicking the can down the road by only talking about the tax ruts and not talking about the spending cuts as well? >> let me tell you something, i was on the bowles simpson commission, i voted for it, bipartisan commission that included spending cuts as well as revenue increases. i know that to reach four or five trillion dollars in deficit reduction you need to put everything on the table. not just taxes for the wealthy. that's an important piece of it, but it isn't all of it. you ed much mor >> the president said today in his news conference that he was very familiar with the literature on the overreach of presidents in their second term or their potential for overreach. do you think that's a possibility here? do you see that? we have heard, for instance, republicans say, hey, we can talk about immigration now. is it possible that some things actually are in reach? >> oh, i do think -- i think immigration reform
Search Results 0 to 8 of about 9 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)